Peels Rik, de Ridder Jeroen, Haven Tamarinde, Bouter Lex
1Philosophy Department, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, De Boelelaan 1089a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019 Aug 22;4:18. doi: 10.1186/s41073-019-0076-4. eCollection 2019.
Both scientists and society at large have rightfully become increasingly concerned about research integrity in recent decades. In response, codes of conduct for research have been developed and elaborated. We show that these codes contain substantial pluralism. First, there is in that codes include values, norms, and virtues. Second, there is , because there are different categories of values, norms, and virtues: epistemic, moral, professional, social, and legal. Within and between these different categories, norms can be incommensurable or incompatible. Codes of conduct typically do not specify how to handle situations where different norms pull in different directions. We review some attempts to develop an ordering of different sorts of norm violations based on a common measure for their seriousness. We argue that they all fail to give adequate guidance for resolving cases of incommensurable and conflicting norms. We conclude that value pluralism is inherent to codes of conduct in research integrity. The application of codes needs careful reasoning and judgment together with an intellectually humble attitude that acknowledges the inevitability of value pluralism.
近几十年来,科学家和整个社会理所当然地越来越关注研究诚信问题。作为回应,研究行为准则已得到制定和完善。我们表明,这些准则包含大量多元性。首先,准则包含价值观、规范和美德,这体现了多元性。其次,准则存在多元性,因为存在不同类别的价值观、规范和美德:认知的、道德的、专业的、社会的和法律的。在这些不同类别内部以及之间,规范可能是不可通约的或不相容的。行为准则通常没有规定如何处理不同规范朝不同方向拉扯的情况。我们回顾了一些基于对违规严重性的共同衡量标准来对不同类型的规范违规进行排序的尝试。我们认为,它们都未能为解决不可通约和相互冲突的规范的情况提供充分指导。我们得出结论,价值多元性是研究诚信行为准则所固有的。准则的应用需要仔细的推理和判断,以及一种承认价值多元性不可避免的理智谦逊态度。